2019 Off season -- Add a superstar, or subtract one?

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,665
LOL, Houston traded Beverley, along with Harrell and Lou Williams for Chris Paul. Think Morey would like to have that deal back?

Jevon Carter is another guy I'd love to see defending next to Smart.
 

mikeot

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2006
5,569
If Kyrie walks, hence AD isn't coming ...

.
Is this a given, that one precedes the other? Has the Brow indicated in any way that this is how it must play out? There are other options. (i.e. possible deal with Kemba Walker, or even Rozier staying) to replace Kyrie. So many variables with FAs, draft picks (as indicated throughout this thread) for DA to work with.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
The East is in my opinion much better than it’s been in years going forward especially if Kahwi and Butler stay where they are. Milwaukee, Toronto, Philly would clearly be better and Indiana with Oladipo is better. What if the Knicks add Kyrie, Durant, keep Knox and not trade him for AD and get Zion or Morant? They’d be better. Then you’ll be thrown in a group with Orlando, Brooklyn, and Detroit. That’s 40-45 win territory and in purgatory. I was a bit hyperbolic with 40 max.
If the Knicks sign Kyrie then some of their PG army is getting traded. As Morant would have the most value, it would be him.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
Is this a given, that one precedes the other? Has the Brow indicated in any way that this is how it must play out? There are other options. (i.e. possible deal with Kemba Walker, or even Rozier staying) to replace Kyrie. So many variables with FAs, draft picks (as indicated throughout this thread) for DA to work with.
There is no way for Boston to replace Irving with Walker. They’d still be capped out without Irving, so max guys are out of their range. Even if Ainge talks 24/7 into leaving via sign & trade for air they TPE is only going to be approximately $20.1 million.
 

mikeot

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2006
5,569
There is no way for Boston to replace Irving with Walker. They’d still be capped out without Irving, so max guys are out of their range. Even if Ainge talks 24/7 into leaving via sign & trade for air they TPE is only going to be approximately $20.1 million.
OK then, no Walker. But what about AD sans Kyrie?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
Do you really fancy another season like last year? Only without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,478
deep inside Guido territory
Do you really fancy another season like last year? Only without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
If it’s Kyrie/AD with others traded/leaving in FA I think chemistry would be better. Filling spots with players who know their roles coming in would make for a better locker room.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,533
Santa Monica
Do you really fancy another season like last year? Only without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
Yea, being at the mercy of Klutch (and Lebron to some extent) while watching Tatum make his 1st All-Star team for the Pels would be unbearable.

Anyone else have some other players they'd like to see here for Plan B:
5.5MM MLE? 3.5MM Bi-Annual?

Unrestricted FAs that have some offensive skill (may come cheap):
Lamb, Collison, Ross, Matthews, Bullock, Tyreke Evans, JaMychel Green, Hood, Ellington, Joseph, Seth Curry, IT, Jeff Green
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,218
Saint Paul, MN
Only without hope as they'd have to gut the team to land Davis, pretty much ensuring that he walks at year's end.
Why exactly are we gutting the team to land Davis? As has been shown over and over, players with one year left on their deals go for much less than fans think. And I know you think you are some sort of nostradamus, but many of us remain unconvinced that all your seeings are going to happen
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,847
around the way
Why exactly are we gutting the team to land Davis? As has been shown over and over, players with one year left on their deals go for much less than fans think. And I know you think you are some sort of nostradamus, but many of us remain unconvinced that all your seeings are going to happen
What's more curious to me is why NH hates AD so much. I get some hesitation with superagency representation, like some teams fear(ed) signing Boras/Rosenhaus/Tellem clients over the years, but it's A fucking D. Guys like that don't grow on trees.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,163
What's more curious to me is why NH hates AD so much. I get some hesitation with superagency representation, like some teams fear(ed) signing Boras/Rosenhaus/Tellem clients over the years, but it's A fucking D. Guys like that don't grow on trees.
He doesn’t hate AD. He was leading the AD charge for last couple of years. But the Klutch situation changes the calculus for some people. Kyrie going to LA would make things even riskier than they already are.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
1,254
Yea, being at the mercy of Klutch (and Lebron to some extent) while watching Tatum make his 1st All-Star team for the Pels would be unbearable.

Anyone else have some other players they'd like to see here for Plan B:
5.5MM MLE? 3.5MM Bi-Annual?

Unrestricted FAs that have some offensive skill (may come cheap):
Lamb, Collison, Ross, Matthews, Bullock, Tyreke Evans, JaMychel Green, Hood, Ellington, Joseph, Seth Curry, IT, Jeff Green
I would think part of Plan B would be to sit down with Horford and tell him that we love him, but if he wants a chance at a championship, he's better off opting out. Plan B should be a minimum 2-3 year retooling and a 33 year old doesn't really fit.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
If it’s Kyrie/AD with others traded/leaving in FA I think chemistry would be better. Filling spots with players who know their roles coming in would make for a better locker room.
That wasn't the question I was asked and the ship's sailed on Kyrie. However, to play your game, do you really see Irving trusting the next five years of his professional career to the Klutch Killer Klown Kar Show? That's a recipe for Irving signing the minimum possible deal to reach his 35% max and thus two more years of listening to the Clash's Should I Stay or Should I Go? on Repeat1.

That would make the team unendurable. Especially with Klutch doing everything in their power to pair Davis with their boss.

Why exactly are we gutting the team to land Davis? As has been shown over and over, players with one year left on their deals go for much less than fans think. And I know you think you are some sort of nostradamus, but many of us remain unconvinced that all your seeings are going to happen
Because the conditional that was in the question I was asked was Irving being gone. So losing Irving, and then Tatum plus whatever is going to leave you with praying that Hayward can get all the way back (and while I'm generally bullish on his future, we do have to own that given his age there's a very real chance that he might only ever get back 80%-90% of that athleticism and need to grow his game in order to be effective), that Horford's decline can be managed so that he remains a top 30 player, and that Brown hits his most aggressive development projection.

All while the player's agents are busily stirring the pot in order to get Davis out of Boston. And what happens if Klutch is successful? You're now a capped out team rebuilding around a guy on the wrong side of 30, an even more on the wrong side 30 Horford, and a guard with some real holes in his game that could prevent him from ever being anything more than an elite roleplayer.

What's more curious to me is why NH hates AD so much. I get some hesitation with superagency representation, like some teams fear(ed) signing Boras/Rosenhaus/Tellem clients over the years, but it's A fucking D. Guys like that don't grow on trees.
Go back and review, I was all for trading Tatum for Davis until Klutch's performance starting around the trade deadline. I have nothing against the player. His agents, on the other hand, suck like a Malaysian ladyboy looking to make a C note the hard way. It appears that they've been singing Davis a siren's song of movie stardom paired up with LeBron in LA. And that he's bought into it.

And let's be honest, they've shown that they're willing to do anything to achieve that goal. I want no part of his mismanagement (it's the same reason I'd want no part of Lonzo Ball ever). And this isn't anything at all like Boras, this isn't baseball, either a player is worth a max deal or he isn't. This isn't about negotiating, because that's a non-factor when discussing guys like Davis. He's worth more than any max deal allowed by the CBA. This about Davis' agent being, basically, a fellow NBA player that's been actively recruiting him.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,401
I would think part of Plan B would be to sit down with Horford and tell him that we love him, but if he wants a chance at a championship, he's better off opting out. Plan B should be a minimum 2-3 year retooling and a 33 year old doesn't really fit.
Plan B should really be a full rebuild. Pretty much everyone on the roster should be made available (note not given away but that should include Tatum and Brown as well as Smart). I don't want this but if the C's are going scrappy again, they should reload on draft assets and expirings.

To me a 40-45 win season, an eighth seed and a quick out does nothing for this franchise. But hey, people won't have to endure the agony of watching Kyrie Irving anymore so...
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
Plan B should really be a full rebuild. Pretty much everyone on the roster should be made available (note not given away but that should include Tatum and Brown as well as Smart). I don't want this but if the C's are going scrappy again, they should reload on draft assets and expirings.

To me a 40-45 win season, an eighth seed and a quick out does nothing for this franchise. But hey, people won't have to endure the agony of watching Kyrie Irving anymore so...
I mean I'm sure that they'll keep their eyes open for deals, but they wouldn't (and shouldn't) be going full rebuild. They'll be back to looking to poach undervalued guys (like Lil' Zeke) and remaining competitive while waiting for Hayward to leave in free agency.

One of the real benefits to Horford and Smart is that it helps set the proper culture for the guys they add, and they'll want at least Marcus around for whomever they pick with the Memphis pick (I'm hoping for 2021 since I think it's an even better draft than 2020 (which will be good, but a little dicey outside the top 5) even before you factor in it being open to HS players again. Right now I've been grooving to video of Jalen Johnson.)
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,401
I mean I'm sure that they'll keep their eyes open for deals, but they wouldn't (and shouldn't) be going full rebuild. They'll be back to looking to poach undervalued guys (like Lil' Zeke) and remaining competitive while waiting for Hayward to leave in free agency.

One of the real benefits to Horford and Smart is that it helps set the proper culture for the guys they add, and they'll want at least Marcus around for whomever they pick with the Memphis pick (I'm hoping for 2021 since I think it's an even better draft than 2020 (which will be good, but a little dicey outside the top 5) even before you factor in it being open to HS players again. Right now I've been grooving to video of Jalen Johnson.)
The Celtics should re-up Irving and acquire Davis. Failing that, they need to look at a major reset.

One of the things we collectively failed to account for is the improvement across the EC this year. As wbcd and HRB have pointed out multiple times of late is that Toronto, Milwaukee and the 76ers all saw improvement both from players on the roster as well as from additions. If Toronto loses Leonard, they will likely take a step back but they still have a very talented roster. The Bucks are loaded for the foreseeable future. The 76ers are going to be decent if they can keep Butler and add some more shooting. The Pacers should see improvement if Oladipo comes back in a reasonable amount of time.

Then you look at the rest of the East with the Nets who should improve organically but may even juice that by adding an Irving or another top FA. The Hawks will be better. Orlando may continue to improve. If Detroit is healthy they have a shot to make the playoffs and Miami should continue to be a lower seed threat. Meanwhile, the poorer teams in the Hornets, Cavs, Bulls and Knicks have opportunities to get better internally or via signings.

If the C's cannot get their one and one-A players this cycle, I am not suggesting they punt on Tatum and or Brown. However they should listen on them. As for Smart, his contract and skill set makes him very attractive (it pains me to say this as he is one of my favorite Celtics ever) and the C's have no need for Horford under this scenario either. They are both great for the culture but neither guy is likely going to have an imprint on the next Celtic contender.

I don't want a complete reset but short of making a run with Irving and Davis, this team has almost no shot of contending anytime soon.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
The Celtics should re-up Irving and acquire Davis.
I said last February that it looked like Irving had already made that decision for them. Someone up thread mentioned that he had a source at 24/7 that indicated that Irving was not in favor of returning.

One of the things we collectively failed to account for is the improvement across the EC this year. As wbcd and HRB have pointed out multiple times of late is that Toronto, Milwaukee and the 76ers all saw improvement both from players on the roster as well as from additions. If Toronto loses Leonard, they will likely take a step back but they still have a very talented roster. The Bucks are loaded for the foreseeable future. The 76ers are going to be decent if they can keep Butler and add some more shooting. The Pacers should see improvement if Oladipo comes back in a reasonable amount of time.
I think most of us were expecting Hayward to return to form more quickly. And Boston force-feeding Gordo's usage rate this year came at a real cost to players that are also drive guys that found themselves reduced to spot shooting to accommodate Hayward.

However, they really can't do anything about Hayward until his contract comes off the books. Given age I am going to agree that there's a very real chance that he never recovers more than 80%-90% of that athleticism and that he's going to seriously need to reinvent himself as a player to be effective going forward.

That being said replacing Irving with a lower-usage rate player and giving Tatum and Brown the chance to show is the route to go in the short term. They've both shown more than enough in their short careers to indicate that they should improve given a larger role in the offense.

As for Smart, his contract and skill set makes him very attractive (it pains me to say this as he is one of my favorite Celtics ever) and the C's have no need for Horford under this scenario either. They are both great for the culture but neither guy is likely going to have an imprint on the next Celtic contender.
Neither player is actually tradeable in any meaningful sense. Both Horford and Smart are really only useful for contenders, and contenders don't actually have anything to trade but low first round picks. You're always better off with guys like that setting the culture than trading them for the chance to draft Josh Okogie.

The thing is that all the teams you cite as improving are teams hoping that their draftees reach Brown and Tatum's levels now. Boston already has those guys. And they'd still have a 2020 or 2021 lottery pick in hand.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,401
I know where you stand regarding Irving and we don't need to keep the debate going. Nobody - not a guy at 24/7 Sports, or SAS or someone's cousin who was at Baskin Robbins - outside of Irving's circle really knows what he wants to do. My guess is that they don't have a firm idea yet either. To be clear, I don't doubt that Irving may be strongly entertaining going elsewhere but I am reasonably sure that nobody on this board knows.

I buy your culture argument but the reality is that a Tatum/Brown core doesn't look ready yet to compete. Perhaps they will each continue to improve but Ainge has to balance a fine line between allowing these guys to find their next level and making sure he doesn't hold on to potential stars awaiting their leap only to find that they failed to launch. I am not suggesting he actively market them but he should certainly listen harder if the Irving/Davis plan doesn't come to pass.

I also agree regarding the limited market for Smart though I think Horford would have much bigger potential set of bidders.

That said, even if Tatum and Brown improve next season, a roster of them, Horford, Smart and Hayward are likely looking at a mid 40 win total and, if they make the playoffs, an early dismissal. That just sucks because Hoford is going to decline further at some point, Smart's talents are wasted on a squad like that and even if Hayward returns to his former self, that isn't enough to make up for the talent gap between Boston and the true contenders.

In short, my preference would be to avoid the mid-tier purgatory because at the end of the day, it nets no banners and with Giannis taking over LeBron's role most talented player in the East, teams looking to contend will have to be bolder than just trying to be scrappy. I know some people are pinning for the scrappy version because its more fun but again, I would argue that its less fun after you've tasted a shot at playing deep into the playoffs.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
I know where you stand regarding Irving and we don't need to keep the debate going. Nobody - not a guy at 24/7 Sports, or SAS or someone's cousin who was at Baskin Robbins - outside of Irving's circle really knows what he wants to do. My guess is that they don't have a firm idea yet either. To be clear, I don't doubt that Irving may be strongly entertaining going elsewhere but I am reasonably sure that nobody on this board knows.
He's looked disengaged for months now. I entertained hopes that he could talk Durant into teaming up here, but that suddenly doesn't look terribly likely. I'm sure Boston will try to sell Kyrie on best case scenarios, I just don't expect it to work. The people over at 24/7 are going to be the ones with the best information, and apparently they don't think he's returning here either.

My best guess is that the next superteam is going to be the Durant/Irving Nets, with either Golden State or Boston taking back Crabbe and a first to make it happen.

If it's the Knicks I guess Boston could ask New York to do Irving for Mudiay. But if it is the Knicks I expect Mudiay (as a sign & trade) to get bundled with Knox and either Smith or their new draftee (the latter being prefereable for salary reasons) to bring in a third star (Beal maybe?).

I buy your culture argument but the reality is that a Tatum/Brown core doesn't look ready yet to compete. Perhaps they will each continue to improve but Ainge has to balance a fine line between allowing these guys to find their next level and making sure he doesn't hold on to potential stars awaiting their leap only to find that they failed to launch. I am not suggesting he actively market them but he should certainly listen harder if the Irving/Davis plan doesn't come to pass.
I don't disagree with this per se. They certainly wouldn't be ready to compete as centerpieces, and Brown probably never. I like Brown, but I tend to see him as the elite roleplayer version of Jimmy Butler. A really valuable player to have as a contender, but not one that takes you there.

Tatum has a lot more upside, and he's shown that he performs better when he's closer to the focal point. But he still needs to fill out more. He's way too skinny, bounces off of contact, and doesn't get the calls yet. And he gets too frustrated too quickly. Thankfully those are maturity issues he should outgrow. But also let's hope that he hooks up with Eric Bledsoe's "nutritionist" this offseason.

That said, even if Tatum and Brown improve next season, a roster of them, Horford, Smart and Hayward are likely looking at a mid 40 win total and, if they make the playoffs, an early dismissal. That just sucks because Hoford is going to decline further at some point, Smart's talents are wasted on a squad like that and even if Hayward returns to his former self, that isn't enough to make up for the talent gap between Boston and the true contenders.

In short, my preference would be to avoid the mid-tier purgatory because at the end of the day, it nets no banners and with Giannis taking over LeBron's role most talented player in the East, teams looking to contend will have to be bolder than just trying to be scrappy. I know some people are pinning for the scrappy version because its more fun but again, I would argue that its less fun after you've tasted a shot at playing deep into the playoffs.
Boston has a mid to high lottery pick in their pocket. They don't need to tank for more picks. I don't think that Giannis' game is going to age well, so Boston is really in a not bad spot to keep building and seeing what Tatum does as he matures physically.

Trading JT to a young team for draft picks has huge backfire potential. What happens when he makes the leap and you've ended up trading him for a mid first round pick (this is a real danger the Hawks face, if Dallas lands a top 4 pick they might have ended up trading Luka Doncic for a decent PG and a mid to late first).
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,206
Yea, being at the mercy of Klutch (and Lebron to some extent) while watching Tatum make his 1st All-Star team for the Pels would be unbearable.

Anyone else have some other players they'd like to see here for Plan B:
5.5MM MLE? 3.5MM Bi-Annual?

Unrestricted FAs that have some offensive skill (may come cheap):
Lamb, Collison, Ross, Matthews, Bullock, Tyreke Evans, JaMychel Green, Hood, Ellington, Joseph, Seth Curry, IT, Jeff Green
If the Celtics don't/can't keep Marcus Morris, I'd try to grab his brother if his value has fallen far enough to accept the MLE.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,665
I don't agree that Boston sans Kyrie is a 40-45 win team and a first round exit. They were not that team in 2017-18, and that was without what Hayward could contribute (if anything). Are they a serious contender? Probably not until the young players develop. But neither is a Kyrie-led team, and the repeater tax won't exactly jump start a rebuild.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
42,789
I don't agree that Boston sans Kyrie is a 40-45 win team and a first round exit. They were not that team in 2017-18, and that was without what Hayward could contribute (if anything).
Kyrie played 60 games in 2017-2018, BOS was 41-19 with him, 14-8 without him. I know you mean the playoffs but you have to get there first and teams without a superstar tend to be exposed over the long haul.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,665
Well, 14-8 translates into 47 wins. And that is without Hayward or players they might add in the offseason who are more effective than Morris or Rozier, including veteran FAs and their multiple first round draft choices.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,436
Kiev, Ukraine
I know where you stand regarding Irving and we don't need to keep the debate going. Nobody - not a guy at 24/7 Sports, or SAS or someone's cousin who was at Baskin Robbins - outside of Irving's circle really knows what he wants to do. My guess is that they don't have a firm idea yet either. To be clear, I don't doubt that Irving may be strongly entertaining going elsewhere but I am reasonably sure that nobody on this board knows.

I buy your culture argument but the reality is that a Tatum/Brown core doesn't look ready yet to compete. Perhaps they will each continue to improve but Ainge has to balance a fine line between allowing these guys to find their next level and making sure he doesn't hold on to potential stars awaiting their leap only to find that they failed to launch. I am not suggesting he actively market them but he should certainly listen harder if the Irving/Davis plan doesn't come to pass.

I also agree regarding the limited market for Smart though I think Horford would have much bigger potential set of bidders.

That said, even if Tatum and Brown improve next season, a roster of them, Horford, Smart and Hayward are likely looking at a mid 40 win total and, if they make the playoffs, an early dismissal. That just sucks because Hoford is going to decline further at some point, Smart's talents are wasted on a squad like that and even if Hayward returns to his former self, that isn't enough to make up for the talent gap between Boston and the true contenders.

In short, my preference would be to avoid the mid-tier purgatory because at the end of the day, it nets no banners and with Giannis taking over LeBron's role most talented player in the East, teams looking to contend will have to be bolder than just trying to be scrappy. I know some people are pinning for the scrappy version because its more fun but again, I would argue that its less fun after you've tasted a shot at playing deep into the playoffs.
If you tank, you're hoping to get top-5 picks that have as much upside potential and track record at age 21 and 22 as Tatum and Brown do. Outside of generational players like AD, LeBron and KD, even future elite players take time to develop. Tanking for picks is probably higher risk than seeing whether Tatum or Brown develop into stars, even if that's not the most likely outcome.

If you wait 2 years and they're still not stars, that's when you blow it up. The exception is if you have some internal evaluation that the rest of the league isn't privy to that indicates to you that their odds are much lower than is commonly assumed. Failing that, you simply won't get reasonable value on the market, given the opportunity cost.

The NBA's system of awarding top picks to shitty teams means that every team has a free option to tank at any point, so there's not a ton of cost to waiting slightly longer if it looks like another route could work. Tatum+Brown+a couple low lotto/mid first draft picks is a route worth giving a shot before any blowup.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,401
Well, 14-8 translates into 47 wins. And that is without Hayward or players they might add in the offseason who are more effective than Morris or Rozier, including veteran FAs and their multiple first round draft choices.
They probably aren't adding players in the offseason who are "more effective than Morris or Rozier". Anyone they are likely to add are going to be around the same or less effective given their cap constraints. You cannot extrapolate what this squad did when the team next year is likely to be considerably different and far less talented overall.

I get that you deeply dislike Kyrie Irving's game but you may need to question not just your evaluation of him but the Celtics roster overall. I would also add that you are on record as suggesting the C's need to do whatever they can to move on from Hayward too. Were they to follow your suggestions, they would likely get far less value in return simply because we can all agree that Hayward is, at present, overpaid for his production.

I stand by my view that a team built around Tatum, Brown, Horford and Smart would likely win somewhere in the mid 40s games unless Ainge/Zarren pull something creative off. And once again, we need to account for other teams in the East who will have improved either via acquisition or organically.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,401
If you tank, you're hoping to get top-5 picks that have as much upside potential and track record at age 21 and 22 as Tatum and Brown do. Outside of generational players like AD, LeBron and KD, even future elite players take time to develop. Tanking for picks is probably higher risk than seeing whether Tatum or Brown develop into stars, even if that's not the most likely outcome.

If you wait 2 years and they're still not stars, that's when you blow it up. The exception is if you have some internal evaluation that the rest of the league isn't privy to that indicates to you that their odds are much lower than is commonly assumed. Failing that, you simply won't get reasonable value on the market, given the opportunity cost.

The NBA's system of awarding top picks to shitty teams means that every team has a free option to tank at any point, so there's not a ton of cost to waiting slightly longer if it looks like another route could work. Tatum+Brown+a couple low lotto/mid first draft picks is a route worth giving a shot before any blowup.
This is fair - I would just argue that if the Celtics are looking at a middling season and, perhaps, sneaking into the playoffs, nobody on the roster should be off limits. I don't think anyone is now either but the bar for trading a Tatum, at present, is a far higher than it might be were Irving to bounce and the C's are looking at three to five year timetable before they have a shot at contending again.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
Kyrie played 60 games in 2017-2018, BOS was 41-19 with him, 14-8 without him. I know you mean the playoffs but you have to get there first and teams without a superstar tend to be exposed over the long haul.
14-8 translates to .630 basketball. If you’re playing .630 ball you’re probably a top 4 seed (as that translates to roughly 52 wins). Even when Irving walks Boston will survive.

And if Irving does leave I imagine that they’ll try to bring back MaMo, which isn’t the worst thing in the world. While we’ve all been frustrated with his play at times this year, a lot of that has been free agency audition pressures, once his contract situation has been settled I expect that he’ll be more like the guy we loved in 2018.

As for Rozier, you look for a team desperate enough to gamble on him to extract value. Like Chicago if they don’t get Morant as they seem to be ready to move on from Kris Dunn. Or Phoenix. Or Orlando. Someone will bite.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
42,789
I don't think it makes much sense to extrapolate 22 games from two seasons ago, I was just pointing out that the Celtics didn't actually play without Kyrie two seasons ago as the post I was responding to made it sound.

As a Yankees/Knicks fan, obviously the financial restraints in the two sports are very different, but the Kyrie situation reminds me of NY having to deal with Robinson Cano's free agency in winter 2013 (wow, that long ago). It was pretty clear that NY would be screwed either way, short-term if they let him go and longer-term if they kept him, which is how it ended up playing out as they didn't adequately replace him until his 5th season in SEA when they brought up Gleyber Torres.

To me it's pretty clear that you don't want Kyrie as your best player if you are trying to win a title and the quicker he realizes this (maybe this postseason did it), the better. I said for a long time about Carmelo Anthony that if he was ever put in the role of the third best player on a title-contending team, he could thrive (Chris Bosh, Kevin Love, Klay Thompson) but he tried and tried to be the #1 that he pretty clearly never was (although he did get DEN to the conference finals one season and NY to the second round). But if Kyrie is your second best player and you have one of the six or eight true superstars in the league, that is a different story.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
I’m not saying that Boston would be better off without him (I’ve maintained the opposite, in fact). I’m just saying that he’s looked for a while now like he’d rather be anywhere but here and that he’s likely gone. But Boston will survive, never fear.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,557
I stand by my view that a team built around Tatum, Brown, Horford and Smart would likely win somewhere in the mid 40s games unless Ainge/Zarren pull something creative off. And once again, we need to account for other teams in the East who will have improved either via acquisition or organically.
You are probably correct that such a team wins 45-ish games and gets bounced by Giannis or Embiid or KL (if he is still in TOR) but there is a non-zero % chance that JB and/or JT make enough of a leap sans KI that they are actually contenders. After all, both of them have certain skills that are hard to find.

As a poster says, there is no downside in finding out where their ceiling is (other than delaying reset for a couple of years) so I suspect that if KI leaves and DA can't get AD, we are going to see exactly how good JT/JB can b. And let's not forget that Time Lord has a chance of being pretty darn good too.

edir: I think the Port Cellar would enjoy watching this scenario the most even if it didn't result in a banner.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,533
Santa Monica
I’m not saying that Boston would be better off without him (I’ve maintained the opposite, in fact). I’m just saying that he’s looked for a while now like he’d rather be anywhere but here and that he’s likely gone. But Boston will survive, never fear.
Exactly. Survive and potentially thrive for many years.

Is it a stretch to imagine:
1. Tatum will get physically bigger this Summer and improves his shot selection next season
2. Brown continues to improve
3. Hayward gets healthier
4. The distraction of FA/minutes goes away with MaMo, Rozier leaving.
PLUS those two were our least efficient rotational players for 2 seasons running*
5. One of our several draft picks becomes a positive bench/role player
6. We add a positive role/bench player via MLE & Bi-Annual
7. Memphis pick doesn't convey and the Grizz fall apart
8. Brad Stevens coaches better

Which of those points is out of line?

YES, a Kyrie/AD led Celtic team is a Vegas darling. We're all happy and get to throw confetti all Summer long.
BUT sans Kyrie/AD, this is still is a high 40/low 50 win team.
The Celtics compete like hell next season with an eye towards the future.

This tanking talk, from a few, is so irrational/bizarre I can't believe it's even being pondered. So if the Celtics don't come into the pre-season a top 8 Vegas favorite, we consider burning it down?

100-1 15th ranked in the NBA. Denver also 15th ranked. Portland 12th. Toronto 9th

http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/23680463/2018-19-nba-title-odds-open-golden-state-warriors-favored-philadelphia-76ers-tops-east

https://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/?sort=TEAM_ABBREVIATION&dir=-1&Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular Season

https://stats.nba.com/players/advanced/?sort=TEAM_ABBREVIATION&dir=-1&Season=2017-18&SeasonType=Regular Season
 
Last edited:

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,665
You are probably correct that such a team wins 45-ish games and gets bounced by Giannis or Embiid or KL (if he is still in TOR) .
What you just described is this year's team.

The only rational reason for paying Kyrie $200M is to lure AD, and given Kyrie's selfishness on the court I doubt if even that pairing will work, which means that you've traded away Tatum and a boatload of picks for a rental.

The rebuild was on course BEFORE Kyrie became available. He cost you a #8, Zizic and an injured IT. That's a loss that can be overcome going forward, especially if Ainge drafts well over the next two years.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,830
It certainly will be better than 17-18.
It's trending to be much better after the leap the conference took in narrowing the talent gap this year. Included in those 14 wins were Chicago, Atlanta (2), New York, and a couple west coast tanking teams in Sacramento and Phoenix. The other thing to factor is that we had Rozier in place of Kyrie playing at a very high level which as much as his detractors here hate to admit he's done as a starter both last year AND this season.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
3,180
We'll know a lot more after Tuesday, but I really wish Memphis had tanked a bit more. There's a 46% chance their pick conveys this year, which just really sucks for the Celtics. Personally, the challenge I see is that a team of Tatum, Brown, Smart, Horford, and Hayward (even just last 10 games of season Hayward) isn't going to tank for the next two years. I think there's a pretty good chance they still make the playoffs as an 8th seed. So, there's no real hope of adding a significant piece to the team through the draft.

So, I think basically, what we are likely looking at is two years of Celtic teams that win about as many as they lose, while we wait for Brown and Tatum to improve their games and for the team to clear Hayward's max contract. After that 2 year period we'll then know whether Brown and Tatum are elite players, and if so, you hope we are able to get another elite player in free agency. That's why I'm a little bit concerned about Horford, because his value in this scenario over the next two years isn't that great, and you are banking on him still being a good player in about 3 years at age 36.

Lots of things can happen, of course, the Sacramento pick could be 2-4, Hayward could regain his All-Star form, and the Celtics could catch lightning in a bottle with one of their late round picks. But, I think all of those things are pretty unlikely.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,533
Santa Monica
It's trending to be much better after the leap the conference took in narrowing the talent gap this year. Included in those 14 wins were Chicago, Atlanta (2), New York, and a couple west coast tanking teams in Sacramento and Phoenix. The other thing to factor is that we had Rozier in place of Kyrie playing at a very high level which as much as his detractors here hate to admit he's done as a starter both last year AND this season.
agreed, starter Rozier > bench Rozier.

I'd count myself as a Rozier detractor.

Unfortunately, Terry's a 2nd or 3rd string PG for a playoff level team. He was nothing more than Kyrie season-ending injury insurance. Terry wasn't a very good player this season. He won't be getting that massive $16-20MM/yr multi-year contract to start for another NBA team as you and others have predicted. Not happening.

Marcus Smart PG > bench or starter Rozier. So I would rather not have the team spend big money for an unhappy, unproductive bench piece who considers himself "a top PG in the NBA". His production or lack of production off the bench is easy to replace. Signing Beverly to the MLE, drafting White early or Thybulle late in the first round are some interesting potential options for the Celtics.
 
Last edited:

lars10

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
5,268
agreed, starter Rozier > bench Rozier.

I'd count myself as a Rozier detractor.

Unfortunately, Terry's a 2nd or 3rd string PG for a playoff level team. He was nothing more than Kyrie season-ending injury insurance. Terry wasn't a very good player this season. He won't be getting that massive $16-20MM/yr multi-year contract to start for another NBA team as you and others have predicted. Not happening.

Marcus Smart PG > bench or starter Rozier. So I would rather not have the team spend big money for an unhappy, unproductive bench piece who considers himself "a top PG in the NBA". His production or lack of production off the bench is easy to replace. Signing Beverly to the MLE, drafting White early or Thybulle late in the first round are some interesting potential options for the Celtics.
Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,708
Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
Smart will be playing the 2 spot next year. People need to get past these old fashioned designations. The offense runs through Irving because he’s the best offensive player. If Irving leaves it will run through Hayward or Horford. To be brutally frank Rozier would be fine at the 1 if he would stop trying to be a point guard and focus on defense and shooting. Horford, Hayward, and Smart are much better playmakers.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
1,912
I agree with Ben Hogan. On a Kyrie less team, with a decent PG, Tatum and Brown would both be 20 point scorers. To me, they proved int he 2018 playoffs that they could help carry a team to wins. What sucks the most about Kyrie leaving as a free agent is losing an asset without compensation, which of course will weaken a team, but the results with Kyrie at the helm of this team were not acceptable to anyone whit championship goals.

If Kyrie bounces, the Celtics will be much more advanced than a typical rebuild. They have two young wings who could develop into all stars in the next two seasons with featured roles. If the Memphis pick conveys, they can add a rotation rookie into the mix right away, and if not,, could end up with another top 3 pick to join Brown and Tatum. They also have three more first round picks to try to get lucky.

I'm guessing they keep Rozier as their starting PG if Kyrie leaves. His splits as a starter (30 games, 31 min, 14.4ppg on 39.6% from three, 5.9 reb, 5.1 ast/1/3 TO) are acceptable, and Ainge and company might think he can blossom as a starter. I'm skeptical, but if they do stay with Rozier, they must have a veteran backup on their roster.

If Kyrie leaves and they don't trade for AD, I can see them retaining Morris for the next three years. Assuming Hayward fully recovers, and all three wings put up big numbers with good efficiency, this could be a 50-55 win team. It certainly will be an easier team to root for than the 2019 squad.

We're on to Chicago. It's not about the past, it's not about the future, we're just preparing for the draft lottery Tuesday night.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,206
Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
This wouldn't worry me at all. I think Smart is miles better than Rozier as a player. I think Smart is closer to Kyrie in value as a player than he is to Rozier.

I'd much rather have a Smart/Jaylen starting backcourt with a cheap veteran third guard over paying Rozier to be my starting point guard.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,533
Santa Monica
Are you really not worried about having Smart as your starting PG? He may be better than Rozier, but that's not saying all that much.
No, not worried about Marcus at the 1 or 2 or whatever you want to label it in the least.

On defense, the Celtics become a switching machine in the half court.
On offense, Marcus could aggressively post/physically work over other PGs while Horford or Hayward run the offense from the top.

My point about comparing Smart w/ Rozier is
1. the team will experience greater success with Smart as your starter over Rozier. Rozier doesn't play well coming off the bench so why have him here?
2. ALSO thought the speculation by some that Rozier would get paid up to $20MM this offseason was nonsense after we just saw what happened to Smart last offseason. Feels like the NBA is becoming very bifurcated during free agency. Teams save for MAX players or use a lot of their cap to retain their own players leaving little for restricted middle tier free agents like Rozier.
 
Last edited:

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
3,180
I do fear that if Marcus is playing most of his minutes at the 1, we are going to have a tough time defending other team's 1s. I'm not saying at all that Kyrie is a great defender, I think he was better than he often gets credit for, but while Marcus is a great defensive player - I don't think he's great at smaller, quicker guards. So, like it or not, the Celtics will likely have someone playing some significant minutes at the 1 that isn't Smart next year.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,533
Santa Monica
I do fear that if Marcus is playing most of his minutes at the 1, we are going to have a tough time defending other team's 1s. I'm not saying at all that Kyrie is a great defender, I think he was better than he often gets credit for, but while Marcus is a great defensive player - I don't think he's great at smaller, quicker guards. So, like it or not, the Celtics will likely have someone playing some significant minutes at the 1 that isn't Smart next year.
Sure we'll need another ball handler or two.

BUT I'd be more concerned about the Celtics ability to score if we lose Kyrie. Losing Rozier, MaMo and Kyrie won't hurt the defense one iota...some may even suggest it would improve ;)

I'd like to see Danny sign Beverly, and/or trade for Jevon Carter and/or draft Thybulle as a late 1st rounder to add some defensive help in the backcourt. I'm not sure what to make of Brad Wanamaker's defense, but he also could be a deep bench option.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,414
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2019/05/11/brad-stevens-needs-make-some-changes-his-approach/82LNh1GhYrEBIHwnOdP08O/story.html

Apparently a lot of the issue was due to the coaching staff not being able to handle players. Last year Walter McCarty was huge int his aren and he wasn't replaced with a former player. Washburn suggests that another ex-player is needed to fill our open coaching position.
I'm going to guess that there were a number of issues. None of them by themselves fatal, but when combined, it led to the disappointment that was this past season.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,783
Santa Monica, CA
They probably aren't adding players in the offseason who are "more effective than Morris or Rozier". Anyone they are likely to add are going to be around the same or less effective given their cap constraints. You cannot extrapolate what this squad did when the team next year is likely to be considerably different and far less talented overall.

I get that you deeply dislike Kyrie Irving's game but you may need to question not just your evaluation of him but the Celtics roster overall. I would also add that you are on record as suggesting the C's need to do whatever they can to move on from Hayward too. Were they to follow your suggestions, they would likely get far less value in return simply because we can all agree that Hayward is, at present, overpaid for his production.

I stand by my view that a team built around Tatum, Brown, Horford and Smart would likely win somewhere in the mid 40s games unless Ainge/Zarren pull something creative off. And once again, we need to account for other teams in the East who will have improved either via acquisition or organically.
The Celtics had a #3 and #1 pick already during this cycle, and they ended up with Brown and Tatum. You're suggesting that they give up on those two guys after 3 years and 2 years, respectively, and try to...what, get another couple of top five picks down the road (if they're lucky) and hope to do better?

The odds of rebuilding are a lot better if you start with those two.